Intel Core i7-5850HQ vs Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data from the database shows a clean sweep for the Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3, which wins all six recorded comparisons against the Intel Core i7-5850HQ. The margins are narrow, but they are consistent across every generation of the Cinebench test suite. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 595 against 588 for the Core i7, a 1.2% advantage. The single-core result in the same test shows the Xeon at 84 versus 82, a 2.4% lead, which is the largest relative gap recorded between the two processors.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds. The Xeon posts a multi-core score of 2482, while the Core i7 manages 2451, a 1.3% difference. In single-core, the Xeon scores 350 and the Core i7 scores 345, a 1.4% edge. The most recent test in the database, Cinebench R23, continues the trend: the Xeon reaches 5910 in multi-core, compared to 5836 for the Core i7, a 1.3% delta. The single-core R23 result has the Xeon at 834 versus 823, again a 1.3% gap.

The overall average benchmark score also favors the Xeon, with 1709 points against 1688 for the Core i7. That difference of 21 points places the Xeon roughly 1.2% ahead on aggregate. Neither chip has a decisive blowout, but the Xeon wins every single metric, and the consistency of that advantage matters. The Core i7 never closes the gap in any test, and its best showing is a 1.2% deficit in R15 multi-core, which is the closest it gets to parity. The database records six wins for the Xeon and zero for the Core i7.

Looking at how these chips sit relative to other processors, both land at the 40th percentile among all CPUs tracked. That means they are effectively peers in the broader performance distribution, despite the Xeon's edge in direct comparison. The Xeon's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 with an identical average score of 1709, the Intel Core i7-990X at 1713 (a 0.2% deficit), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U at 1715 (0.4% behind). The Core i7-5850HQ, by contrast, sits alongside the Intel Core i7-3770K at 1688, the AMD Ryzen 7 3750H at 1690 (0.1% behind), and the Intel Core i7-980 at 1693 (0.3% behind). The Xeon's rival pool is slightly stronger on average, which makes its win over the Core i7 more notable.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous in direct head-to-head terms: the Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 wins every benchmark recorded against the Intel Core i7-5850HQ. If the choice is purely about Cinebench performance, the Xeon is the pick. The margins range from 1.2% to 2.4%, which is not a transformative gap, but it is a consistent one. No test in the database shows the Core i7 pulling ahead, and the single-core advantage of the Xeon, up to 2.4%, suggests it holds an edge in lightly threaded workloads as well.

However, the verdict is not a simple matter of raw scores. The Xeon is a server and workstation part with a 140 watt TDP, while the Core i7 is a desktop chip with a 47 watt TDP. That is a 93 watt difference, and it speaks to entirely different design goals. The Xeon is built for sustained, multi-threaded throughput in a workstation chassis, where power draw is secondary. The Core i7 is built for a compact desktop or mobile-class system, where thermal and power constraints are tighter. The benchmark scores are close, but the operating envelopes are not.

Who should pick which? From the recorded data, the Xeon is the choice for anyone prioritizing peak Cinebench scores in a system that can handle its power requirements. The Core i7 is the choice for a build where the 47 watt TDP and the integrated Iris Pro Graphics 6200 matter more than a 1.3% average performance lead. The Core i7 also uses DDR3 memory with dual-channel support, while the Xeon uses DDR4 with quad-channel support, so platform-level memory bandwidth heavily favors the Xeon. The Xeon's 68.3 GB/s memory bandwidth versus the Core i7's 29.9 GB/s is a massive difference that does not show up in Cinebench but will matter in memory-bound workloads.

The Core i7 is not a bad chip by any means. It matches the Xeon's 40th percentile standing among all CPUs, and its nearest rival, the Core i7-3770K, scores identically at 1688. But in this specific matchup, the Xeon is the faster processor in every measured dimension. The only reasons to choose the Core i7 are power, platform, and integrated graphics, not performance.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel microarchitectures and are built on different process nodes. The Xeon E5-1620 v3 uses the Haswell architecture, specifically the Haswell-EP variant, and is fabricated on Intel's 22 nm process. The Core i7-5850HQ uses the Broadwell architecture, specifically Broadwell-H, and is fabricated on Intel's 14 nm process. The node shrink gives the Core i7 a smaller die size of 182 mm², compared to the Xeon's 356 mm². The Xeon also carries a transistor count of 2,600 million, while the Core i7 does not have a recorded transistor figure in the database.

Both chips have four cores and eight threads, so the fundamental compute configuration is identical. The cache hierarchy, however, differs. Each core has 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 on both processors, but the shared L3 cache is larger on the Xeon at 10 MB, versus 6 MB on the Core i7. That 4 MB difference in shared cache can influence workloads that rely on frequently accessed data, though the Cinebench results suggest the impact is modest.

The integrated graphics situation is a major architectural divergence. The Xeon has no integrated graphics, which is typical for a server or workstation part. The Core i7 includes Iris Pro Graphics 6200, which is a notable feature for a desktop chip and one of the reasons it can serve in systems without a discrete GPU. The Xeon, by contrast, requires a separate graphics solution.

Memory architecture also separates the two. The Xeon supports DDR4 memory over a quad-channel bus, yielding a theoretical memory bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s. The Core i7 supports DDR3 over a dual-channel bus, with a theoretical bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, while the Core i7 does not. For workstation or server use, ECC support is a critical feature. The PCIe configuration likewise favors the Xeon, which offers Gen 3 with 40 lanes, while the Core i7 offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes.

Specification Differences

The specification table shows several fields where the two processors diverge. The base clock differs significantly: the Xeon runs at 3.50 GHz, while the Core i7 runs at 2.70 GHz. The boost clock is identical at 3.60 GHz for both. The TDP is the most dramatic difference, with the Xeon at 140 watts and the Core i7 at 47 watts.

The socket is entirely different. The Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3, while the Core i7 uses Intel BGA 1364. That means they are not interchangeable in any platform. The memory support differs, with the Xeon on DDR4 and the Core i7 on DDR3. The memory bus width differs as well, with quad-channel on the Xeon and dual-channel on the Core i7. Memory bandwidth, as noted, is 68.3 GB/s versus 29.9 GB/s.

ECC memory support is present on the Xeon and absent on the Core i7. PCIe lane count is 40 on the Xeon and 16 on the Core i7. The integrated graphics field is empty for the Xeon and lists Iris Pro Graphics 6200 for the Core i7. The market segment is recorded as Server/Workstation for the Xeon and Desktop for the Core i7. The release dates are also different, with the Xeon launching in September 2014 and the Core i7 in June 2015. The Core i7 has a launch MSRP of $434, while the Xeon has no recorded launch MSRP.

The production status for both is end-of-life, so neither is a current-generation part. The part numbers are recorded as QGZYSR20P for the Xeon and SR2BH for the Core i7.

FAQ

Q: Which chip wins in multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 wins all three multi-core tests. In Cinebench R15, it scores 595 versus 588 for the Core i7-5850HQ. In R20, it scores 2482 versus 2451. In R23, it scores 5910 versus 5836.

Q: Is the single-core performance difference larger than the multi-core difference?

A: Yes, in the R15 test. The Xeon leads by 2.4% in single-core (84 versus 82), while the multi-core lead in the same test is 1.2% (595 versus 588). In R20 and R23, the single-core deltas are 1.4% and 1.3%, respectively.

Q: How do these chips compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Xeon's average benchmark score of 1709 ties the Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 and sits 0.2% behind the Intel Core i7-990X. The Core i7's average of 1688 ties the Intel Core i7-3770K and sits 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i5-4690K.

Q: What is the most significant architectural difference?

A: The process node and memory subsystem. The Core i7 uses a 14 nm process with a 182 mm² die, while the Xeon uses a 22 nm process with a 356 mm² die. The Xeon also supports DDR4 quad-channel memory with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth, versus DDR3 dual-channel at 29.9 GB/s on the Core i7.

Q: Does either chip have integrated graphics?

A: Only the Core i7-5850HQ has integrated graphics, specifically Iris Pro Graphics 6200. The Xeon E5-1620 v3 has no integrated graphics and requires a discrete GPU.

Q: Can these two chips be used in the same motherboard?

A: No. The Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3, while the Core i7 uses Intel BGA 1364. The sockets are incompatible, and the memory types differ as well, with the Xeon on DDR4 and the Core i7 on DDR3.